IR 05000397/1993047
| ML17290A925 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1993 |
| From: | Ang W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17290A924 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-93-47, NUDOCS 9401250217 | |
| Download: ML17290A925 (9) | |
Text
U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report Number:
Docket Number:
License Number:
50-397/93-47 50-397 NPF-21 Licensee:
Facility Name:
Washington Public Power Supply System P. 0.
Box 968 Richland, WA 99352 Washington Nuclear Project Unit 2 Inspection Conducted:
November 29 December 2,
1993 Inspector:
F.
Gee, Reactor Inspector Approved by:
Inspection Summary:
W. An C ief Engin ring Section
.)./~s Date Signed Ins ection durin the eriod of November 29 throu h December
1993, Re ort Number 50-397 93-47 Areas Ins ected:
The inspector conducted an announced routine inspection to evaluate the adequacy of the licensee's'instrumentation surveillance program.
Followup of.
open items from previous inspections was also performed.
The inspector used inspection procedures 62704 and 92701 as guidance for this inspection.
Results:
General Conclusions and S ecific Findin s:
The instrumentation and c'ontrols activities observed during this inspection appeared to be adequately performed.
The licensee failed to properly update a scheduled maintenance card during a
change of procedure.
Safet Issues'Mana ement S stem SINS Item:
None 940i2502l7 931217 PDR ADQCK 05000397 Q
Si nificant Safet chatters:
None Summar of Violations and Deviations:
One non-cited violation was noted in paragraph 3b involving a failure to update a scheduled maintenance system card to include the annual eight-hour surveillance requirement for all emergency lighting units during a change of procedure.
0 en Items Summar
The inspector closed one follow-up ite Details Persons Contacted Washin ton Public Power Su l
S stem H. Baird, Manager, Operations Training D. Coleman, Acting Manager, Regulatory Programs H. Flasch, Director, Engineering R. Fuller, Licensing Engineer J. Gearhart; Director, guality Assurance K. Lewis, Technical Specialist H. Mann, Assistant Hanager, Operations K. Newcomb, Fire Marshal R. Parker, Engineer, Technical Services J.
Sims, Shift Technical Advisor Coordinator G. Smith, Manager, Operations Division W. Shaeffer, Manager, Operations D. Schumann, Acting Manager, Operating Event Analysis Review J.
Swai les, Plant Manager J. Wells, Engineer, guali ty Assurance U. S. Nuclear Re ulator Commission D. Pereira, License Examiner D. Proulx, Resident Inspector S. Sanchez, Resident Intern All of the above personnel attended the exit meeting on December 2,
1993.
The inspector also held discussions with other licensee personnel during the inspection.
Instrumentation and Controls I&C Maintenance 62704 a ~
Observation of I&C Surveillances
. During the inspection, the inspector selected two Instrumentation and Controls (I&C) surveillances for observation, Procedure 7.4.3.3.1e54
"HPCS Initiation Drywel1 Pressure High B&D CFT/CC" and Procedure 7.4.3.3. 1.22
"ADS Trip System A, Reactor Water Level Low, Levels 3 CFT/CC."
The inspector observed the pre-
'job and post-job briefings and the surveillances.
The activities observed included the following:
Procedure revision validation Management supervision of the survei llances Notification of Operations of the removal of system from service Entries of technical specification limiting conditions for operation (LCO)
Use of calibrated measuring and testing equipment
Procedure compliance Use of acceptance criteria in procedures Verification of control room indications and alarms Verification of system lineup before returning system to service Handl>ng of the replacement of qual>f~ed parts
~
Handling of initiating procedure change
~
Observance of radiological controls The licensee appeared to perform these activities adequately.
I8C Hot Shop During the preparation for the surveillances, the inspector visited the I&C Hot Shop.
The Hot Shop was where contaminated equipment was located.
The inspector observed that the roof was leaking rainwater and that the equipment was not maintained in a ready-to-use condition.
For example, the water pots, which were used for level instrument surveillance; contained water with suspended sediment from previous usage.
The location of contamination survey equipment was not near the step-off pad, and the fire alarm was out of service.
The inspector concluded that the maintenance and housekeeping of the facility were less than adequate and conducive to improper conduction of survei llances by using improperly maintained equipment.
The licensee management acknowledged the conditions and initiated corrective actions during the week of the inspection.
Monitoring of Instrument Performance The inspector reviewed the licensee's monitoring of instrument performance.
The licensee I8C Programs Group monitored instrument surveillance data, trended instrument performance and actuation setpoints, and predicted instrument failures.
The inspector reviewed the group's trended data on instruments MS-LIS-100 A and 8 of the high pressure core spray system.
The data were from June 1992 to November 1993.
The trended data indicated instrument setpoint drift over this period of time.
The inspector considered the licensee was collecting sufficient data to monitor long term instrument performance.
In addition, the Reliability Centered Maintenance Group under the Maintenance Support organization was responsible for the development of the operational scheduled maintenance program, monitoring"of equipment conditions, review and trending of equipment-surveillance data and maintenance history, prediction of pending failures, and initiation of replacement of equipment before catastrophic fai.lure.
The inspector reviewed the group's November 1993 quarterly report, the report on vibration anomalies on reactor recirculation pumps, and the report on reactor heat removal pump service life.
The inspector concluded that the
d.
reports indicated that the licensee was maintaining and analyzing data to ascertain long term equipment performance.
Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment The inspector reviewed the licensee's control process for calibrating measuring and test equipment.
The licensee's Standards Laboratory control process included a recall system, for tracking instrumentation due for calibration, incoming and outgoing reports for instruments, and calibration records.
The licensee's calibration control program for measuring and test equipment appeared to be adequate.
The inspector also verified the traceability of calibration standards in the Standards Laboratory for pressure, flow, and temperature to established standards.
The inspector also observed the performance of the calibration of pressure and temperature instruments in the laboratory.
No violations or deviations from NRC requirements were identified.
~F11 2N a ~
0 en Follow-u Item 50-397 92-25-04 Surveillance Testin for Electrical Protection Assemblies Back round of the Follow-u Item During the test team inspection in 1992, the inspector reviewed twelve surveillance test procedures on six electrical protection assemblies (EPAs).
These assemblies provide undervoltage, underfrequency, and overvoltage protection for the reactor protection system (RPS)
components.
In the review of these surveillance data, the inspector identified that whenever the surveillance period was more than eleven months, the trip setpoints of these EPAs drifted outside the acceptance criteria.
In addi tion, the trip setpoints did not account for the instrument inaccuracies of the measuring and test instruments.
The EPAs were designed to protect against long-term thermal degradation at the RPS loads due to overvoltage, undervoltage, or underfrequency.
Licensee's Actions in Res onse to the 0 en Item Since the inspection, the licensee initiated the following documents to address the issues:
~
Calculations E/1-02-93-1282,
-1283, and -1284, to address the trip setpoints for undervoltage, underfrequency, and overvoltage protections, respectively
~
Calculation Hodification Record 93-0595 Revision 0 to account for voltage drop across connecting cables and for the maximum and minimum input voltage requirements of each load
~
Problem Evaluation Request 293-1249 to identify that the most limiting conditions existed in the vendor RPS specification (CVI 02C72-03, 1)
In addition, the licensee replaced some of the EPAs with a modified model.
The licensee was monitoring the HG set output voltages weekly.
The licensee stated that the performance of the HG set output voltage regulator was adequate, and the output voltages were stable.
Ins ector's Actions Durin the Present Ins ection The inspector reviewed the last nine survei llances of the six EPAs.
The longest period between surveillances was seven and a
Waif months.
The.data from these nine survei llances indicated no apparent trend of setpoint drift.
The licensee performed these survei llances with adequate frequency.
The inspector also observed that the licensee had not completed the aforementioned calculations and Problem Evaluation Request at the time of th'is inspection.
Discussion and Conclusion Since the licensee had not completed the setpoint calculation's and the evaluation on the EPAs, this item remains open pending further review.
Closed Unresolved Item 50-397 93-40-02 Surveillance Testin for Emer enc Li htin Units Back round of the Follow-u Item During a fire protection inspection in September 1993, an inspector requested the past surveillance record of the annual eight-hour discharge test for five randomly selected emergency lighting units.
The licensee was unable to provide the requested documentation to confirm performance of the units during the inspection 93-40.
Licensee's Actions in Res onse to the 0 en Item During the search for the records for the inspector, the licensee identified that the scheduled maintenance system (SHS) card for the emergency lighting units was not updated in April 1993 to reflect a change of procedure.
In April 14, 1993, plant procedure 10.25. 156,
"Emergency Lighting Inspection Annual," replaced
plant procedure 10.25.63,
"Emergency Lighting Inspection."
The SNS card was not updated and referenced to the new procedure.
Eighteen emergency lighting units were inadvertently not scheduled for the annual surveillance.
The emergency lighting units were past the annual due date.
The licensee's Procedure 1.5. 13,
"Scheduled Maintenance System,"
Revision 0, dated September 30, 1993, permitted the completion of the surveillance within a twenty-five percent grace period past the due date.
The licensee immediately performed the required annual discharge surveillance.
One of the units was approximately twenty days into the twenty-five percent grace period.
Two of the eighteen emergency lighting units failed.
The licensee replaced the battery of the two failed units.
The iicensee also initiated corrective actions to update the SNS card for the emergency lighting units and revised plant procedure 10.25. 156 to ensure equipment number information appearing on the data sheets for better tracking.
In August 1993, the licensee recognized the need for updating SNS cards during a procedure revision.
The licensee issued Maintenance Instruction 3. 1.2,
"Haintenance Procedures Group Work Practices,"
to requi re a review of the SNS cards for update during a change of procedure.
The licensee was in the" process of updating all SNS cards.
Ins ector's Actions Durin the Present Ins ection The inspector reviewed Procedure 1.5. 13,
"Scheduled Maintenance
,System,"
Revision 0.
The inspector also reviewed Maintenance Instruction 3. 1.2 and verified that proper guidance was provided in the maintenance instruction to prevent the recurrence of SNS cards not being updated during a procedure change.
Discussion and Conclusion The inspector considered that a change of'roc'edure being not reflected in the surveillance requirements on. the SNS card for the emergency lighting units to be a violation of 10 CFR Part
Appendix B Criterion V, "Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings."'lant procedure 1.2.4, "Plant Procedure Approval, Revision and Distribution," governing procedure revision was inappropriate to the circumstances in that a
SNS card for fire protection was not updated to include all emergency lighting units.
This violation was not cited since the criteria of Section VII.B of the NRC Enforcement Policy for non-cited violations (NCVs) were satisfied (NCV 50-397/93-47-01, Closed).
One non-cited violation was note Exit Meetin The inspector conducted an exit meeting on December 2,
1993, with members of the licensee staff as indicated in paragraph 1.
During the exit meeting, the inspector summarized the scope of the inspection activities and reviewed the inspection findings as described in this report.
The licensee acknowledged the concerns identified in the report.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the information provided to, or reviewed by, the inspector during this inspectio l
'I'